Re: [PATCH 2/4] mm, compaction: more reliably increase direct compaction priority

[Michal Hocko]

On Fri 23-09-16 12:47:23, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 09/23/2016 10:23 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Fri 23-09-16 08:55:33, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> > [...]
> >> >From 1623d5bd441160569ffad3808aeeec852048e558 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> >> From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@xxxxxxx>
> >> Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 17:02:37 +0200
> >> Subject: [PATCH] mm, page_alloc: pull no_progress_loops update to
> >>  should_reclaim_retry()
> >>
> >> The should_reclaim_retry() makes decisions based on no_progress_loops, so it
> >> makes sense to also update the counter there. It will be also consistent with
> >> should_compact_retry() and compaction_retries. No functional change.
> >>
> >> [hillf.zj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx: fix missing pointer dereferences]
> >> Signed-off-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@xxxxxxx>
> >> Acked-by: Hillf Danton <hillf.zj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > OK, this looks reasonable to me. Could you post both patches in a
> 
> Both? I would argue that [1] might be relevant because it resets the
> number of retries. Only the should_reclaim_retry() cleanup is not
> stricly needed.

Even if it is needed which I am not really sure about it would be
easier to track than in the middle of another thread.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs